Comments on: Tom Ince – The one that got awayhttp://backpagefootball.com/tom-ince-the-one-that-got-away/48745/
Tue, 31 Mar 2015 09:30:49 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1By: Teshttp://backpagefootball.com/tom-ince-the-one-that-got-away/48745/#comment-227796
Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:54:29 +0000http://backpagefootball.com/?p=48745#comment-227796If he was here now it wouldn’t stop him demanding an inflated wage or first team football.
Yes, he has developed in the Championship but it was his attitude that was the problem, not his lack of talent.

We moan about overpaying for players, both wages and transfer fees, so we can’t moan when the club refuses to pay an inflated salary to an unproven player, no matter his ‘potential’.

What we should be asking is did we insert a ‘buy back’ clause or a ‘sell-on’ clause when we sold him.
This is the area we really are missing out. We can’t give every young player sufficent game time to satisfy them, but we can ensure we benefit financially if the player ‘comes good’ after being sold.

]]>By: Timhttp://backpagefootball.com/tom-ince-the-one-that-got-away/48745/#comment-227791
Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:40:33 +0000http://backpagefootball.com/?p=48745#comment-227791I wondered when Tom Ince was going to start picking up some attention on blogs etc. Nice and well argued piece. I would probably agree that Ince’s time coincided with a mindset of buying proven PL quality (I’m not saying it was a success) and to be fair to Rogers, I doubt Ince was showing the sort of stuff at 17 that Sterling has.

However, Liverpool in general have a terrible record in bringing young talent through from their academy. I can’t believe Pacheco is STILL there, scraping into Europa League squads, while players like El Zhar, Danny Guthrie, Adam Hammil have had to waste the formative years of their careers doing similar before being farmed out.